Linde

The early bird 🦅catches the worm 🐛

$LIN (+0,54 %) bought up 👀 at under 400 I would buy more 😬

Last major acquisition this year

$LIN (+0,54 %)
$ECL (+0,57 %)
$ABBV (+1,12 %)

From now on only 2 standing orders

On the one hand $VWCE (+0,17 %) and $ETN (-0,22 %)

From sand to chip: how is a modern semiconductor made?

Reading time: approx. 10min

1) INTRODUCTION

Since 2023 at the latest and the rapid rise of Nvidia $NVDA (+2,01 %) semiconductors and "AI chips" in particular have been the talk of the town. Since then, investors have been chasing after almost every company that has something to do with the manufacture of chips, driving share prices to unimagined heights. However, hardly any investors really know how complex the value chain is within the production of modern chips.

In this article, I will give you an overview of the entire manufacturing process and the companies involved. Even if many of you have a vague idea that the production of modern chips is complex, you will certainly be surprised by how complex it really is in reality.

2) BASIC

The starting point for every chip are so-called wafers [1] - i.e. thin wafers, which usually consist of so-called high-purity monocrystalline silicon. In the field of power semiconductors, which primarily comprises chips for applications with higher currents and voltages, silicon carbide (SiC) or galium nitride (GaN) has recently also been used as the base material for the wafers.

In the so-called front end the actual core components of the chips - the so-called dies - are created and applied to the wafers. The dies are rectangular structures that contain the actual functionality of the later chip. The finished dies are then tested for their functionality and electrical properties. Each die that is found to be good is then integrated into the so-called backend where the individual dies are separated on the wafer. This is followed by the so-called packaging. The individual dies from the front end are then electrically contacted and integrated into a protective housing. In the end, this housing with the contacted die is what is usually called a chip chip.

Now that we have a rough overview of the overall process, let's take a closer look at the individual processes involved in producing the dies on the wafer. This is the area in which most highly complex machines are used and which is usually the most sensitive.

3) FROM SAND TO WAFER

Before wafers made of high-purity silicon can even be produced and the actual process for manufacturing dies can begin, the actual wafer must first be manufactured in almost perfect quality. To do this, quartz sand, which consists largely of silicon dioxide, is reduced with carbon at high temperatures. This produces so-called raw siliconwhich, with a purity of around 96%, is not yet anywhere near the quality required for the production of wafers.

In several chemical processes, which are carried out by Wacker Chemie
$WCH (+1,9 %) or Siltronic
$WAF (-3,21 %) are used to turn the "impure" silicon into so-called polycrystalline silicon with a purity of 99.9999999%. For every billion silicon atoms, there is then only one foreign atom in the silicon. However, this pure polycrystalline silicon is still not suitable for the production of wafers, as the crystal structure in the silicon is not uniform enough. In order to create the right crystal structure, the polycrystalline silicon is then melted again and a so-called ingotwhich is made from monocrystalline silicon is produced. A comparison between raw silicon and the ingot can be found in the following image [3]:

This ingot is then sawn into thin slices, which are then the final wafers for semiconductor production. The best-known wafer producers are Shin Etsu
$4063, (-1,14 %)
Siltronic or GlobalWafers
$6488.

4) FROM THE WAFER TO THE DIE

The wafers described in the previous section can now be used to produce dies. The overall process for producing dies basically consists of applying a large number of layers using various chemical, mechanical and physical processes. The overall process (depending on the product) takes approx. 80 different layers on the wafer, requiring almost 1000 different process steps and 3 months
non-stop production are required [4].

A macroscopic analogy is useful here, which I have also taken from [4]. You can compare the overall process for producing dies with baking a large multi-layer cake. This cake has 80 layers and the recipe for baking consists of 1000 steps. It takes 3 months to make the cake and if even one layer of the cake deviates from the recipe by more than 1%, the whole cake collapses and has to be thrown away.

In the first process steps, the wafer is covered with billions tiny little transistors are created on the wafer, which are then all individually electrically contacted in the following steps. The final steps consist of electrically connecting the transistors to each other, resulting in a complete electrical circuit [4]:

Each individual layer of the approximately 80 layers in the die requires highly specialized processes, which can be roughly summarized as:

• Applying masks: Photolithography, photoresist coating (applying photoresist)
• Apply material: Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD), Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), Atomic Layer Deposition
• Remove material: Plasma annealing, Wet annealing, Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP)
• Modify material: Ion Implanting, Annealing
• Material cleaning
• Inspecting the layers: Optical, Microscopical, Focused Ion Beam, Defect Inspection

Apply masks

Ultimately, a mask can be thought of as an enlarged copy of the structure of a special layer in the die. These so-called photomasks are then scanned using so-called scanners or steppers "copied" in reduced size onto the wafer. The best-known manufacturer of such lithography systems is ASML
$ASML (-1,59 %). It is currently the only producer of lithography systems that make it possible to produce structures smaller than 10 nanometers on the wafer. In today's powerful and modern chips, such as those found in smartphones, AI chips and processors, the smallest structures are around 3 nanometers in size. Other manufacturers of lithography systems for larger structures (10nm and larger) are Canon Electronics
$7739 or Nikon $7731 (+1,29 %) .

The photomasks - i.e. the enlarged "copies" of the structures - are produced by companies such as Toppan $7911 (-7,06 %) , Dai Nippon Printing
$7912 (-1,09 %) or Hoya $7741 (-3,54 %) manufactured. Systems for cleaning the photomasks or for applying the photoresist are produced, for example, by Suss Microtec
$SMHN (+0,76 %) for example.

Apply/remove/modify/clean material

As can be seen in the overview above, there are a variety of methods and processes for modifying the material of a particular layer. As a result, there is a lot of different equipment that can handle a process very well with incredible specialization. The best-known and most successful equipment manufacturers include Applied Materials $AMAT (+0,53 %), LAM Research
$LRCX (+0,38 %), Tokyo Electron (TEL)
$8035, (-0,76 %)
Suss Mictrotec, Entegris
$ENTG (-0,55 %) and Axcelis $ACLS (-0,8 %).

The material - for example, highly specialized chemicals - is of course also required for production. Companies such as Linde
$LIN (+0,54 %), Air Liquide
$AI (-0,22 %), Air Products
$APD (+0,04 %) and Nippon Sanso
$4091 (+0,26 %) are major manufacturers of process gases such as nitrogen, hydrogen and argon.

Inspect

As mentioned, every single layer in the manufacturing process of a die must be perfect in order to obtain a functional die at the end. Any small deviation or foreign particles can impair the functionality of the die. As the function of the die can only be checked precisely on the finished die, it is advantageous to inspect the individual layers for defects and deviations during production. Special machines are required for this, which must be able to do different things depending on the layer. Manufacturers of such machines include KLA
$KLAC (+0,46 %) or Onto Innovation
$ONTO (-0,62 %).

The following applies to almost all of the companies mentioned in this section: the companies are highly specialized and have quasi-monopolies on the machines for certain process steps. quasi-monopolies. Suitable equipment therefore usually costs several million dollars. In addition, some of the systems are so complex that they can only be serviced by the manufacturer's own service staff, which results in recurring service revenues for every machine sold. As a rule, each machine requires several highly specialized engineers to ensure long-term stable operation.

5) FROM THE DIE TO THE FINISHED CHIP

Once the wafer has been processed, the dies on the wafer are checked for functionality. There is highly specialized equipment for this, so-called probers. These probers test each individual chip several times, if necessary, to check the functionality implemented in the design. Manufacturers of such probers include Teradyne $TER (-0,02 %), Keysight Technologies
$KEYS (+1,5 %), Onto Innovation or Tokyo Electron. These probers have to control each individual die, some of which are only a few square millimetres in size, and contact the corresponding much smaller test structures with tiny needles. The testing process is sometimes outsourced to entire companies that offer die testing as a complete package. One example of such providers is Amkor Technology
$AMKR (-0,58 %).

The processed and tested wafer is now sawn to obtain individual dies. The dies that are found to be good are then integrated into a protective housing in the backend. The dies that have not passed the functionality test are either sorted out or (depending on the error pattern) processed as a variant with reduced functionality similar to those with full functionality. After a final functional test in the package, the chip is ready for use.

6) FOUNDRIES, FABLESS & SOFTWARE

Now that we have an overview of the complex process of manufacturing a chip, let's zoom out a little further to understand which companies perform which tasks in the semiconductor industry.

It's funny that not once in the manufacturing process has the name Nvidia $NVDA (+2,01 %) or Apple $AAPL (+1,34 %) has been mentioned? Yet they have the most advanced chips, don't they?

The pure production of the chips is done by other companies - so-called foundries. Companies like Nvidia and even AMD $AMD (-0,35 %) are in fact fablessThis means that they do not have their own production facilities but only supply the chip design and let the foundries manufacture the actual chip according to their design.

The design of a chip is like the blueprint for production - the foundries then take over the recipe creation and the actual production. There is special software for designing chips. Companies known for this software include Cadance Design
$CDNS (+0,16 %) and Synopsys $SNPS (-1,06 %). But also the industrial giant Siemens
$SIE (-0,29 %) now also supplies software for designing integrated circuits. Synopsys also offers other software for data analysis within foundry production.

Speaking of foundries; the best known foundry is probably TSMC
$TSM, (+0,43 %) which is the global market leader in foundries. TSMC designs itself no chips itself and specializes exclusively in the production of the most advanced generations of chips. Another major player that also masters the most advanced structure sizes is Samsung $005930. In contrast to TSMC manufactures Samsung also produces its own designs. Other large foundries are Global Foundries
$GFS, (+0,33 %) which was originally a spin-off from AMD and the Taiwanese company United Micro Electronics
$UMC. (-0,79 %)

The best-known fabless companies - i.e. companies without their own chip production - are Nvidia, Apple, AMD, ARM Holdings
$ARM, (-2,66 %)
Broadcom $AVGO (+0,31 %), MediaTek $2454 and Qualcomm $QCOM. (+2,48 %) In the meantime Alphabet $GOOGL, (+0,94 %)
Microsoft $MSFT, (-1,05 %)
Amazon $AMZN (+0,26 %) and Meta $META (-2,23 %) have designed their own chips for certain functionalities and then have them manufactured in foundries.

In addition to foundries and fabless companies, there are of course also hybrid models, i.e. companies that take on both production and design. The best-known examples of this are, of course, companies such as Intel
$INTC (+1,8 %) and Samsung. There is also a whole range of so-called Integrated Device Manufacturer (IDM)which for the most part only manufacture their own designed chips and do not accept customer orders for production. Well-known companies such as Texas Instruments
$TXN, (-0,01 %)
SK Hynix
$000660,
STMicroelectronics
$STMPA, (-0,02 %)
NXP Semiconductors
$NXPI, (+0,87 %)
Infineon $IFX (-1,35 %) and Renesas $6723 (+2,12 %) are among the IDMs.

FINAL WORD

The aim of this article was to provide an overview of the complexity of the semiconductor industry. I do not, of course no claim to be complete, as there are of course many other companies that are part of this value chain. As Getquin thrives on active exchange, I'll give you some food for thought to discuss in the comments below the article:

• feel free to link any other companies in the comments if you think I've forgotten any relevant ones
• what was the most surprising new information for you from the article?
• which companies from the article have you never heard of?
• before reading the article, did you know approximately how a modern chip is produced and what steps are necessary for this?

In general, I can recommend the 20-minute YouTube video at [4] to any interested reader. It provides an excellent animated overview of the manufacturing process of modern chips.

Stay tuned,

Yours Nico Uhlig (aka RealMichaelScott)

SOURCES:

[1] Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wafer

[2] https://www.halbleiter.org/waferherstellung/einkristall/

[3] https://solarmuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/solarmuseum_org-07917.jpg

[4] Branch Education on YouTube: "How are Microchips Made?" https://youtu.be/dX9CGRZwD-w?si=xeV0TYgJ2iwNOKyO

Hello everyone

I'm also making my first post 😄.

I hope you are all doing well.

My current buy candidates are:

$ASML (-1,59 %)

$SSUN Samsung stock I never find 😅

$NESN (-0,19 %)

$P911 (-0,41 %)

I still follow some of them:

$OR (-0,71 %) under 305€

$LIN (+0,54 %) under 385€

$MCD (-0,31 %) under 355$

$CVX (+0,4 %) under 135$

$BAS (-0,12 %) under 42.50€

What do you think?

What are your buy candidates?

Greetings from Switzerland.

Linde Q3 2024 $LIN (+0,54 %)

Financial performance

• RevenueLinde reported revenue of USD 8,356 million for Q3 2024, a slight increase compared to USD 8,155 million in Q3 2023.
• Operating profitOperating profit amounted to USD 2,086 million in Q3 2024 compared to USD 2,052 million in Q3 2023.
• Net incomeNet income for Q3 2024 amounted to USD 1,550 million, slightly lower than USD 1,565 million in Q3 2023.

Balance sheet summary

• Total assetsAs of September 30, 2024, total assets amounted to USD 82,546 million, compared to USD 80,811 million at the end of 2023.
• Total liabilitiesTotal liabilities increased to USD 41,943 million, compared to USD 39,716 million at the end of 2023.

Details of the income statement

• Cost of goods soldCost of goods sold amounted to USD 4,356 million in Q3 2024, slightly higher than the USD 4,314 million in Q3 2023.
• Interest expenseNet interest expense increased to USD 68 million in Q3 2024, compared to USD 40 million in Q3 2023.

Cash flow overview

• Operating cash flowOperating cash flow for Q3 2024 amounted to USD 2,731 million, compared to USD 2,520 million in Q3 2023.
• Capital expendituresCapital expenditures for the third quarter of 2024 amounted to USD 1,066 million, compared to USD 948 million in the third quarter of 2023.

Key figures and profitability ratios

• Adjusted EBITDAAdjusted EBITDA for Q3 2024 amounted to USD 3,253 million, compared to USD 3,037 million in Q3 2023.
• Adjusted EBITDA marginAdjusted EBITDA margin was 37.9% in Q3 2024, down slightly from 38.9% in Q3 2023.

Segment information

• Americas: Sales amounted to USD 3,618 million in Q3 2024, slightly down on USD 3,629 million in Q3 2023.
• EMEA: Sales increased to USD 2,111 million in Q3 2024 from USD 2,105 million in Q3 2023.
• APAC: Sales increased to USD 1,716 million in Q3 2024 compared to USD 1,639 million in Q3 2023.

Competitive position

Linde continues to focus on optimizing its base operations, taking advantage of the economic recovery and seizing growth opportunities in areas such as electronics, healthcare and renewable energy.

Forecasts and management commentary

• Adjusted EPS forecastAdjusted EPS for the full year 2024 is expected to be between USD 15.40 and USD 15.50, an increase of 8% to 10% compared to 2023.

Risks and opportunities

• Linde invests in business growth and shareholder returns, supported by a solid balance sheet.
• The company is also focused on sustainable value creation through clean energy projects.

Summary of results

Linde's financial performance in Q3 2024 shows steady growth in sales and operating profit, with a strong focus on optimizing operations and investing in growth sectors. The balance sheet remains robust, supporting continued investment and shareholder returns. The company is well positioned to capitalize on opportunities in clean energy and other growth segments, but also faces challenges such as rising interest expenses and capital expenditures. Overall, Linde's strategic initiatives and financial health point to a positive outlook for the remainder of 2024.

Positive Aspects

• Sales growthLinde recorded a 2% increase in sales to USD 8,356 million in Q3 2024 compared to the previous year. This growth was supported by price increases, despite stagnating volumes.
• Improvement in the operating profit marginAdjusted operating profit margin improved by 130 basis points to 29.6% in Q3 2024, reflecting successful productivity initiatives across all segments.
• Strong project backlogLinde's project backlog increased to USD 10 billion, including the largest gas sales project in the company's history. This secures future growth and demonstrates the strong demand in the industrial gas sector.
• Growth in adjusted EPSAdjusted earnings per share (EPS) increased by 9% year-on-year to USD 3.94 in Q3 2024, reflecting effective cost management and strategic pricing.
• Cash flow generationOperating cash flow increased by 8% to USD 2,731 million in Q3 2024, reflecting better working capital management and supporting ongoing investments and shareholder returns.

Negative aspects

• Stagnation in volume growthDespite the increase in sales, volume growth remained flat, indicating potential challenges in expanding market share or demand in certain segments.
• Rising interest expensesNet interest expense increased to USD 68 million in Q3 2024, compared to USD 40 million in Q3 2023. This could impact net profitability if not managed effectively.
• Higher capital expenditureCapital expenditure increased to USD 1,066 million in Q3 2024, compared to USD 948 million in Q3 2023. This could put pressure on free cash flow if revenue growth does not increase proportionally.
• Economic challengesManagement statements highlighted continued weak economic trends, particularly in industrial end markets, which could jeopardize future growth opportunities.
• Currency risksThe forecast for the full year assumes a currency risk of 1%, which could affect overall financial performance if currency fluctuations develop unfavorably.

Does anyone know why, when the earning call isn't until 2 p.m., it's already $LIN (+0,54 %) is already rattling so much?

Which shares would you currently take profits on?

I am currently $MSFT (-1,05 %)
$GOOGL (+0,94 %)
$BLK (+0,12 %)
$LIN (+0,54 %)
$V (-0,14 %) very well up at the moment (40-50%). Would you let the shares or profits continue to run or realize profits? I am unfortunately undecided

Good morning,

I haven't had any individual stocks in the last 10 years, but have now decided to invest in 10 stocks again. I have already chosen 9 of them, one is still missing. Perhaps someone can give me a tip.

I have the following criteria:

-No tech, I have enough of that already

-If possible, no USA. But this is not an exclusion

-Dividend doesn't matter

-Investment horizon > 10 years

Here are the 9:

$LOTB (+1,69 %)

$CTAS (+0,17 %)

$LIN (+0,54 %)

$8001 (-0,17 %)

$RMS (+0,75 %)

$LMT (+0,94 %)

$V (-0,14 %)

$BRK.B (+0,07 %)

$BLK

If there are any concerns about the nine, I will gladly take some out again

Update: @RealMichaelScott Someone has asked in the comments for the reasoning behind my selection so far. I'd like to answer that here:

There are a few more smart criteria that fit my preferences and gut feeling. These would be:

I like stocks with long-phase linear growth, see $CTAS (+0,17 %) in the last 12 months and $8001 (-0,17 %) . $LOTB (+1,69 %) is one of the best stocks in the world in my opinion. Exponential growth will certainly turn around at some point, but I don't like cyclicals. I also value positive free cash flow. I am not interested in P/E ratios (for whatever reason). Another reason is diversity with the 10 stocks, I'm not sure yet. $LIN (+0,54 %) was and would still be the only DAX stock that makes it to me. I would have gladly done without Armor, but unfortunately it will be part of the next 10 years, so $LMT (+0,94 %) . I'm also looking for stocks that closed 2020 and 2022 on a positive note.

$BRK.B (+0,07 %) is somehow part of such a portfolio:-), I'm not sure about $V (-0,14 %) I'm not sure about. Thanks for the suggestions on medical+health, that's definitely still missing. I still have doubts about energy. Due to the climate problem, I don't know where the journey will take us.

Update 2: Thanks for all the good suggestions. I took advantage of the bad weather and the window day today and have now made my decision:

$BLK (+0,12 %) flies out again, $V (-0,14 %) stays

Instead there are 2 new ones from your suggestions:

$CAT (+0,86 %) and $NOVO B (-17,74 %)

So it looks like this:

$LOTB (+1,69 %)

$CTAS (+0,17 %)

$LIN (+0,54 %)

$8001 (-0,17 %)

$RMS (+0,75 %)

$LMT (+0,94 %)

$V (-0,14 %)

$BRK.B (+0,07 %)

$CAT (+0,86 %)

$NOVO B (-17,74 %)

I did a backtest from 1.1.2020, all equally weighted

Average annual return: 24.32%

Total return approx. twice as high as the S&P ETF $CSPX (+0,32 %)

In the difficult years 2020 and 2022 each over 13% plus

10k became 28.5k with dividends in the 4.5 years

Nice linear progression over the entire term:

But unfortunately: forecasts are difficult, especially when they concern the future!

⚡ Gas giants of the future: who will lead the energy race? 🏁

Company presentation

The four leading players in the global industrial gases market are Linde, Air Liquide, Air Products and Chemicals and Nippon Sanso Holding. Each of these companies has a long history and has developed into a major player over time:

- Linde was founded in Germany in 1879 and is today an undisputed market leader.

- Air Liquide was founded in France in 1902 and ranks second on the world market.

- Air Products and Chemicals was founded in the USA in 1940 and is number three in the market.

- Nippon Sanso Holding has its origins in a company founded in Japan in 1910 and is currently number four in the industry.

Historical development

The industrial gases sector is characterized by remarkable stability. The same companies have dominated the market for over a century, indicating high barriers to market entry and a particularly robust business model. In recent decades, there has been increasing consolidation:

- 2018 saw the merger of $LIN (+0,54 %) and Praxair, creating the new industry leader.

- 2016 $AI (-0,22 %) Liquide acquired its US competitor Airgas to strengthen its market position

$4091 (+0,26 %) Sanso benefited from the mergers of its competitors and was able to expand through strategic acquisitions in Europe and the US.

Business model

The four companies produce and distribute industrial gases such as oxygen, nitrogen and hydrogen, which are indispensable in numerous sectors, from the steel industry to medical technology. The business model is based on long-term customer relationships, technological expertise and highly efficient logistics that enable the gases to be transported and delivered safely and economically.

Core competencies and future prospects

The companies' core competencies lie in the efficient production and distribution of industrial gases and in their in-depth technical expertise. All four companies are increasingly focusing on growth markets such as hydrogen technology and electronic gases, which are seen as key areas for the future. In particular, the growing demand for clean energy sources and the development of new technologies create potential for further growth.

Market position and competition

The global market for industrial gases is dominated by these four companies:

- Linde is the clear market leader.

- Air Liquide follows in second place.

-$APD (+0,04 %) ranks third.

- Nippon Sanso is number four on the market.

Together, Linde and Air Liquide control around 63% of the global market share, underlining their supremacy in the industry.

Total Addressable Market (TAM)

The global market for industrial gases is growing continuously and is expected to continue to expand in the coming years. Although exact figures on the "Total Addressable Market" (TAM) are not publicly available, it is estimated that the global market for industrial gases will reach a value of USD 173.43 billion by 2030.

Share performance

The valuation and performance of the shares of these companies show considerable differences:

With a market capitalization of $221.43B, Linde is currently the most valuable of the 4 companies. Since the IPO on June 17, 1992, Linde has returned 10,041% and on a 3-year basis is at 55.72%. Air Liquide is at 44.28% on a three-year basis and at 3,248.2% since the IPO on January 2, 1992, clearly behind Linde. APC is at 5,183.8% since the IPO on January 2, 1990, ahead of Air Liquide but behind Linde. On a 3-year basis it is at 11.07%. Nippon Sanso is at 71% and has only reached 1,311.56% since the IPO on January 6, 1992, making it the worst of the four stocks.

For the development (company figures), a better view and more, check out the free blog:https://topicswithhead.beehiiv.com/p/gasriesen-der-zukunft-wer-wird-das-energie-rennen-anf-hren

Conclusion

If I were to focus on just one company, it would be a difficult decision. Therefore, I look at two stocks, but still go through the decision process thoroughly. When I bring together all the relevant information about the industry and my personal priorities, I tend to see Linde as the preferred choice. The industry requires capital and Linde is the best positioned in this respect. In addition, the larger companies clearly benefit from being able to leverage their size effectively with banks and customers. Linde is well positioned in both Europe and America, and recent developments in the US have increased its focus on shareholder return. As an established brand, Linde also offers excellent diversification.

Air Products and Chemicals is also interesting, but has weaknesses compared to Linde in its ties to "heavy industry". Although this can have advantages, it has also brought disadvantages in recent years. I therefore initially considered Air Liquide as a possible favorite. They are strongly positioned in many business areas and have a well-known brand, even if they have a "somewhat" weaker presence in the USA. However, their culture and domicile in Europe is super pronounced, which affects shareholder value a little.

If you want better diversification, which is the case with APC and Air Liquide as they cover different strengths, you should take the two, because you have to remember that Linde shares have only really gained in value in the last four years. Even though I personally would prefer Linde and Air Liquide, I actually think Air Liquide and APC are a better rational choice due to their diversified positioning and stable market position in the areas in which they operate.

And you buy shares for the future development and not the past.